Editorial: Changing Perspectives in Speech and Language Neuropsychology, 1863-2023

Frank W Stahnisch ^1* Paul Eling ² Stewart Longman ¹ Pascale Tremblay ³

• ¹ University of Calgary, Calgary, Canada
• ² Radboud University, Nijmegen, Gelderland, Netherlands
• ³ Laval University, Quebec, Quebec, Canada

Efforts continued throughout the second half of the 19 th century, and there was increased activity in the wake of the two World Wars. One hundred years later, interest resurged in the earlier ideas when new approaches were initiated by individuals such as Wilder Penfield (1891Penfield ( -1976) ) in Canada (Penfield, 1949) and Norman Geschwind (1926-1984) in the USA (Geschwind, 1970). Historiographical approaches to the understanding of these efforts have considered the applied models and metaphors of speech and language neuropsychology, methodological approaches in the clinic and laboratory, as well as on the status of evidence, the flow of ideas and people, along with interdisciplinary exchanges with anthropology, education, linguistics, medicine, and sociocultural contexts (Eling, 1994).The scholarly collaboration represented in this Research Topic resulted in fresh content and challenging perspectives on the development of speech and language neuropsychology. For instance, the twenty contributing authors have investigated phases and events of the longstanding debate between localizationists and holists in the field of neuropsychology. They have analyzed how and why new concepts and theories have emerged, including for clinical and rehabilitation purposes (Stahnisch and Hoffmann, 2010). Furthermore, the limits imposed by certain models on basic and clinical research since Broca's and Wernicke's times were investigated (Tremblay and Dick, 2016). By bringing scientific authors and humanistic researchers into interaction, this Research Topic have offered unique perspectives and historical case studies that can advance our understanding of neuropsychology, aphasiology, and behavioral neuroscience, while rising above the boundaries between neurological diagnostics, behavioral assessments, clinical applications, and entrenched ways of knowing. This domain of academic research continues to prosper, especially since the widespread uses of modern neuroimaging techniques. The advancement of neuropsychological research and cognitive neuroscience are gaining increasing recognition in the wider medical and rehabilitative community, while pushing the envelope regarding disciplinary boundaries existing in neurology, psychiatry, psycholinguistics, and clinical psychology (Finkbeiner, Max, Longman and Debert, 2016).The eight articles cover the development of the field of speech and language neuropsychology over a period of hundred and sixty years, such as in the contribution by Tremblay (Université Laval, Québec City) and Brambati (Centre de Recherche de l'Institut Universitaire de Gériatrie de Montréal), who examine how 19 th -century conceptions and analyses, based in the study of neurological disorders, were to be transformed through recent studies in the neurobiology of speech and language in relation to physiological insights towards neural architectures. The study by Longman (University of Calgary) and Schwartz (Dalhousie University, Halifax) investigates the historical conceptualization of 'foreign accent syndrome' following brain trauma or due to psychiatric illnesses since the end of the 19 th century.Several of the articles also examine the beginning of the 20 th century, which was a time of the interdisciplinary formation of the neurosciences, while the casualties of World War I gave rise to many new insights into the development of speech and language disorders due to the isolated brain lesions in war veterans due to gunshot, shrapnel, and bayonet wounds. Stahnisch's (University of Calgary) contribution delves into Kurt Goldstein's (1878Goldstein's ( -1965) ) and Adhémar Gelb's (1887-1936) clinical and psychological works based on war veterans and contrasts these with Norman Geschwind's and his American pupils' positioning towards holistic and localizational perspectives, as they formed the modern-day problem basis in the neurology of aphasia and speech neuropsychology throughout World War II and into the postwar period (Finger, 1996).Most of the contributions implement localized examples and theoretically focused analyses, placing them in general thematic contexts. The article by LeBlanc (McGill University), for example, offers a case study comparing the work of the Russian psychologist and anthropologist Alexander Luria from the 1930s-1950s, on the acquisition, expression, and loss of spoken and written speech, with the elucidation of the structure-function relationships of the brain by the doyen of Canadian neurological surgery, Wilder Penfield (1891Penfield ( -1976)), as he applied electrocortical stimulation techniques in the operation theatres of the Montreal Neurological Institute. Benso, Chiorri, Ardu, Venuti, and Paqualotto (Universities of Trento, Genoa, Geneva, the University of Applied Sciences and Arts of Southern Switzerland in Manno, and the Associazione Neuroscienze Cognitive Clinica Ricerca Intervento at Genova) critically examine the evolution of cognitive modularity and address the challenges of combining foundational theories with empirical findings and theoretical advances. The investigation of categorical structure sorting approaches by Persichetti, Shao, Denning, Gotts, and Martin (National Institutes of Health and University of California at Los Angeles) demonstrate that categories of abstract concepts can be defined without using foregoing concept understandings or specific judgments as shown by their research participants. Alexander, Hedrick, and Stark (Indiana University Bloomington) analyze the phenomenon of inner speech in the daily lives of people with aphasia, emphasizing the age-dependence of the phenomenon over frequent reports among aphasic test persons and in the existing literature. Finally, Phillips (National Institute of Advanced Industrial Science and Technology, Tsukuba, Japan) focuses on the universality of the Language of Thought hypothesis, emphasizing that psychological category development follows from a universal mapping principle which connects symbolic and non-symbolic representational formats of cognition and visual perception. Overall, this Frontiers in Psychology Research Topic underscores the important contribution made by recent scholarship of the changes in perspectives on speech and language neuropsychology. It offers us new perspectives, forges historical insights and philosophical comprehension, and provides multiple case examples and empirical studies that can inform current debates in behavioral neuroscience.